What are the differences between the 07 upgrade test and the 08 recert test? I have taken both in the last two weeks and didn't really notice any difference (except for the new law changes). Does the test not change until the 06 upgrade?
Ya, the 8 -> 7 test is the same recert test. When you want to go to the state level you take a different exam.
It is 85% for us for the 07 upgrade. Got a 92 on the 08 so I guess my score on the 07 ought to be higher (in theory at least). As for the 06 upgrade test, what is different?
Yes assuming I don't miss my flight back from San Antonio. We are taking my mother-in-law to SA for a birthday vacation but I am flying back for a day for the clinic.
The questions on the 06 test are much more technical and tricky. They will test you on not only game things but technical things like what a card is given for and if you show a card or simply report it. Study the ATR as most of the questions come from there.
When someone complains I called a throw-in the wrong way, I tell them I got an 87% on the exam. That means I get one out of every ten decisions wrong!
I studied this plus the ATR, Guide to Procedures, LoTG http://referee.wnyreferee.org/Docs/TEST STUDY GUIDE Grade 5-6, 2011-2012.pdf
Questions from our State "Practice" Test: Forward Team A receives ball "onside" and behind defense Team B. In the Penalty Area, Team B fullback catches up and runs by Team A forward with no contact, causing him to stumble and lose control of ball briefly over goal line outside of goal. You blow the whistle. What do you do? a. Drop ball at the 18 b. Penalty kick for Team A c. Goal Kick For Team B d. Send off fullback and indirect kick. A bit different from the 7/8.
"Drop ball" is on an official practice exam from the state?!? (OK, I know it's picky, but I really would expect official materials to use the official language.)
We were told the answer was a DOGSO Red for fullback and Indirect restart for impeding. My mouth was hanging open...
The very first sentence is poorly constructed and causes confusion. How can he "receive the ball onside" if he is "behind the defense"? I'm already trying to guess what the writer is trying to say and it's not even the important part of the question! (Test writer FAIL 1) "runs by... with no contact, causing him to stumble". Who is "him? Does "no contact" mean with the attacker? Or with the ball? Or with neither? (Test writer FAIL 2) The only part of the question that is clear at all is "You blow the whistle." Great. Just great. I now have 1 out of 4 chance of guessing what the question is trying to ask. It's not that I don't know the answer. I don't even know what they're asking! Both as a referee and an ex-teacher, I want to beat this writer with a stick. My knowledge of the laws isn't being tested here, it's my reading comprehension along with a lot of random guessing about what the writer was thinking.
I agree, this is a poorly written test question, I also would have answered C. In what way am I supposed to infer there was impeding taking progress. I imagined the defender simply ran past the attacker and did nothing. Anyone else thinking this while they were reading?
This is not an actual test question and it never will be. This is simply a practice question written by some uneloquent idiot trying to get the message across that an IFK offense can be DOGSO.
Thank goodness. I was trying to figure out how crazy I was cause there is no way I would have forgotten that question this past year on the test.
The guy who wrote the practice questions is the same guy who writes the test questions for us. And it is easy to get a ball onside behind the defense if defense is running a trap and a forward breaks out correctly for a through pass. Maybe tomorrow I post the "pass back" question....
Agree poor question. And I agree that C is the "best" answer. (A is bad because there is no such thing as a "drop ball" . . . and b/c the question seems to say that the ball went over the goal line before the whistle was blown. B is bad b/c no DFK offense is described. And D is bad b/c there is not enough information to infer impeding and because there is not enough information to determine if the 4Ds are met. as the brief loss of control over the goal line suggests he might not have been moving toward the goal. Yes, it is valid to get people to understand that an IFK offense can lead to DOGSO [I've never seen it -- has anyone?], but it fails utterly, and encourages people to read things into the question that aren't there, whcih can be death on a well-written test.)
You guys are making me feel better. I came out at (c) also, but it took me a few minutes of parsing to get there.